A Survey of Internal Medicine Residents: Their Learning Environments, Bias and Discrimination Experiences, and Their Support Structures

Abstract

PURPOSE: While there is an emerging body of literature that demonstrates how racism and bias negatively impact the experiences of physicians and trainees from underrepresented groups in medicine in the US, little is known about the experiences of internal medicine trainees and their learning environments. The purpose of this study was to examine these learning environments and explore trainees' perceptions of race/ethnicity-related topics. METHODS: A 35-item confidential electronic survey was disseminated to trainees from 11 internal medicine training programs in the US. A total of 142 trainees participated. Purposive sampling ensured alignment with 2018 IM trainee demographics by sex, race and ethnicity. Analyses were performed including chi-square, Fisher's exact tests, and logistic regression. RESULTS: Key findings reveal 63% of respondents perceived disparities in the care provided to diverse patients. Two in three respondents were confident that their institution would respond to discrimination, but only 1/3 of respondents perceived appropriate reporting mechanisms. Black/African American trainees reported needing to minimize aspects of their race and were less likely to perceive their institutions as being supportive to people of color. CONCLUSION: Access to timely information about trainees' experiences with discrimination and bias in graduate medical education is imperative to disrupt systemic racism and health inequities. Findings suggest a perceived difference in health care provided to minoritized groups, a gap in formal mechanisms for reporting racism and discrimination experienced by trainees, and environments that challenge a sense of belonging. Findings add to current literature exposing the experience of underrepresented trainees in the US.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.